I feel George Wallace symbolizes something in the past which America has rejected.
Interpretation
George Wallace represents a past ideology that America has moved away from.
In this quote, Coretta Scott King suggests that George Wallace, known for his segregationist policies, embodies a mindset and values that America has consciously decided to reject. It reflects the nation's evolution and moral progress, indicating a shift away from racism and division towards unity and inclusivity.
In practice
In a speech about civil rights, I might quote this to highlight societal progress.
I've always felt that homophobic attitudes and policies were unjust and unworthy of a free society and must be opposed by all Americans who believe in democracy. The civil rights movement thrives on unity and inclusion, not division and exclusion. My husband's struggle parallels that of the gay rights movement.
...We have an historic opportunity for a great global healing and renewal. If we will accept the challenge of nonviolent activism with faith, courage, and determination, we can bring this great vision of a world united in peace and harmony from a distant ideal into glowing reality.
I think if people really read Martin Luther King, Jr., then they would begin to understand what he really represented.
It doesn't matter how strong your opinions are. If you don't use your power for positive change, you are, indeed, part of the problem.
Sometimes, I am also identified as a civil rights leader or a human rights activist. I would also like to be thought of as a complex, three-dimensional, flesh-and-blood human being with a rich storehouse of experiences, much like everyone else, yet unique in my own way, much like everyone else.
People don't ever have to starve to death; there are solutions. We have failed if we can't eradicate hunger in Africa and Ethiopia.
It was his subconscious which told him this - that infuriating part of a person's brain which never responds to interrogation, merely gives little meaningful nudges and then sits humming quietly to itself, saying nothing.
Had the cub thought in man-fashion, he might have epitomized life as a voracious appetite, and the world as a place wherein ranged a multitude of appetites, pursuing and being pursued, hunting and being hunted, eating and being eaten, all in blindness and confusion, with violence and disorder, a chaos of gluttony and slaughter, ruled over by chance, merciless, planless, endless.
That the universe was formed by a fortuitous concourse of atoms, I will no more believe than that the accidental jumbling of the alphabet would fall into a most ingenious treatise of philosophy.
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
You have no idea how fragile an actor's self-worth is.
Ownership is not limited to material things. It can also apply to points of view. Once we take ownership of an idea - whether itβs about politics or sports - what do we do? We love it perhaps more than we should. We prize it more than it is worth. And most frequently, we have trouble letting go of it because we canβt stand the idea of its loss. What are we left with then? An ideology - rigid and unyielding.
Subscribe for the occasional hand-picked quote. No noise.